lets meet the candidates. threerles presley is a term senator. before that, he served in the iowa house of representatives. >> patty judge is the former lieutenant governor. iowalso served in the senate. >> it is time to hear from each of them. seconds. have 90 we flipped a coin to see who would go first. patty judge.s to

ms. judge: i want to thank you for hosting us. also the college for their participation. it is great to have this opportunity. i want to thank the audience and those watching us around the state. to talkan opportunity about issues that are important minds of people, not just in iowa but across the country. frustration, is a gridlock. needs to change. in order for that to change, i believe we are going to need to have new leadership. the obstruction of the supreme court is unprecedented. be finding ways to

move forward. we need to be working on the economy. we need to talk about loan debt. making sure young professionals are not buried under debt. there are issues up and down that are not being discussed. i will move to work this for you again. >> there is a problem with our timeclock. you have the time you need for your opening statement. senator grassley: thank you to the sponsors of this debate. say, condolences for the loss of your father. fory day, my job is to work

iowans. if they do not work for iowans, no one else well. i think of three approaches. one, jobs like the wind energy tax credit. export related jobs. secondly, taxpayers need accountability. act passed that brought 48 nine dollars back to the treasury. national security is the number one responsibility of the federal government. also, economic security. the policies have to be supplemented with progrowth

policies. that is what i have been doing. continue them if i am elected and i would very much appreciate your vote. >> now questions from your panel. each candidate will have one minute. ask anelists may follow-up. the first question tonight, answered by chuck grassley. it focuses on the nomination of judge garland. you have opposed convening confirmation hearings. you said you would consider after a lame session. why soft in your stance? >> i will not change my position that the people ought to have a voice and the new president will make the next appointment, as

far as i am concerned. the reason we did not have a hearing, and 52 other senators agreeing with that, we have taken the position that is similar to what democratic senators have taken when there has been republican presidents, three different ones. in thent that they made, last year of a presidential then,if a vacancy happens you give the people a choice and they go ahead and let the new president make it. you can't have one rule for presidents and another for republicans. we are being consistent. >> let's be specific or the other senators, if they were to change their mind and favor confirmation hearings, would you consider it? if a majorityey: of the senate said they were

going to move ahead, a chairman serves at the majority of the senate of the united states. i would follow the will of the majority of the senate. you, on theion to confirmation hearings for judge garland. you have advocated for them. i want to take you to june of 1992. joe biden talked hypothetically about postponing those hearings on any supreme court vacancy, should there be one, until after the election. given your at the ski for hearings, do you believe the vice president of the united states, one of the leaders of your party, was wrong twice six years ago? i believe we now have historyest time in the of this country between a nomination and a hearing. that is unprecedented.

i believe it is hampering the court. court that is not able to function as it was designed by the constitution read we have n. disrupted the balance of power. thatver joe biden said, if is in fact his view, that is not my view. the duty of the judiciary committee is to have a hearing. my opponent is refusing to do that. it should be done and i am troubled by this answer about a lame-duck session. he is leaving himself some wiggle room so they can have a hearing for judge garland between the time the election is over and hillary clinton takes office. >> you have 30 seconds to respond. senator grassley: 1968, there was a vacancy. the democratic senate decided

vacancy.ll the mix and was elected and appointed two new people. in 2011, and even gave a speechreid where he said there is nothing in the constitution that says the senate has to move ahead. that is the checks and balances of our government. >> what is your response? thisudge: my response is is wrong. this is obstruction of the process. we have a supreme court that is unable to function. this is exactly what is wrong with washington. this is why people are angry. ,nstead of getting to work doing what should be done, they are playing political games in washington dc and it has to

stop. senator grassley: would you give me five seconds? with thenothing wrong checks and balances in the constitution. ident nominates, the senate advises and consents or does not consent. based on what senator reid said. 15. will give you the same ms. judge: we can talk about what somebody said. the truth of the matter is, we have not had a optioning court for months. not have a functioning court for many more months. that is wrong. that is political game, whether it is being played by the republicans or the democrats, it is wrong and it needs to stop. >> the next question will focus on the affordable care act.

you recently admitted health insurance and other costs remain extremely on affordable despite having -- extremely una ffordable. ms. judge: i think the affordable care act was clearly a step forward. we are providing health insurance for millions of people that did not have it before. that is good. we do need to make some changes to the act. we do not need to do what my opponent has tried to do several times and that is to get the act repealed. replace it with what, i don't know, because there has never been an alternative put forward. we do need to look at that. we need to be finding a way to control the rising cost of premiums. finding a way to control the cost of prescription drugs.

purpose.left out on again, my opponent was part of that decision. people have been paying a price in this country ever sense for high cost prescription drugs. i believe we can make this act work and this country will be better because of that. >> can you elaborate on any specific changes you would recommend? ms. judge: we need to examine closely what is driving insurance costs and then make decisions on how we could curb that. this was part of the reason we instituted the affordable care act, is because insurance premiums kept rising. people were not able to get coverage. they were also being thrown off insurance coverage when they had a serious only this. we took steps to fix that. we are not perfect yet but we can do that. we can find ways to curb costs.

>> that is your time, thank you. >> we continue to fight to repeal obamacare? senator grassley: it is a failure. all you have to look at 13 counties of iowa which are going to have one choice for the exchange. just one choice. are going upmiums 28%. over the next 10 years, they are projected to go up 61% on top of that. lied to about obama care. remember, your premiums were supposed to go down 2500? remember, if you like your doctor, you can keep them? millions have had to change their doctors. millions of people have had to change their insurance. >> that is your time. i don't think thate

the more than one million people that have insurance today, the young professionals who have not yet established themselves and have insurance of their own now allowed to stay on their parents' policies would call this a failure. this is a big step forward. it is not perfected. we need to polish it. quit playing games and find a way to make this work. senator grassley: can i speak about small businesses? a lot of small businesses wanted to give their people money to buy insurance. obamacare ruled that out. if you violate that law, you are day for pay $200 every every employee that violates that. i have put in legislation to repeal that part of obamacare.

we should encourage as many small businesses that want to help their people get insurance anyway to get it. lets talk ethanol and the renewable fuels standards. congress approved ethanol fuel mandates in 2005 for iowans. it means jobs and economic growth, not just replacing foreign oil with domestic plant taste fuel. now in congress, some say the mandates should be faced out. where do you stand? i fullygrassley: support the renewable fuel standard and the tax credits that go with ethanol and aodiesel until they get to be mature industry. the renewable fuel standard is law until 2022.

i believe we have the votes in the senate to make sure that is not repealed, but we have a big problem with the epa wanting to cut down on the amount that is supposed to be done. they don't have the authority to do it, but this administration that said they were for ethanol have let them get away with it. that is a big victory for big oil. big oil can't win in congress but they can win in this obama administration. my opponent seems to like everything that epa does. ruining it by not having it mixed with petroleum as it should be. you are not going to get a lot of argument between senator pressley and i on the renewable fuel standard -- senator grassley and i on the

renewable fuel standard. ethanol is homegrown and we are proud of it. we need that fuel standard in place to make things work until the industry can mature. while people have criticized this, it is not as significant as the subsidies that big oil has received four years and years which senator grassley has supported. >> a response? senator grassley: it is a big job to defend ethanol in washington dc because there are many people ignorant of it. people from the midwest fight hard against epa. you can get 10 republicans and democrats to meet with the chief of staff of president obama, which we have had to do to get ahead of epa. the reason there is a lot of

ignorance is because so many people in washington dc eethanol."it " "ewe are done with ethanol, ethanol." the next question, much of the national security policy is focused on two areas. national security and threats on the border. tackling al qaeda. when it comes to national security, should it be on home, abroad or both? ms. judge: that is a big question for a minute. >> we can give you all the time you need. ms. judge: you are correct. i was the homeland security officer for the state of iowa for four years.

during that time, i was briefed regularly on threats, both to us here in the u.s. and overseas and there is a threat both places. it has to be, really has to be addressed both places. there is lots of activity in the middle east and we are all reading about that. i think the obama administration is doing a good job of pushing back on the threat of isis in the middle east. is good surveillance going on here in the united states. we have to be constantly vigilant. there is probably nothing more important than making sure our families are safe here in united states. my opponentsley: said before the sioux city newspaper, the board of editors

or whatever you call it, we were containing isis. it is in 36 countries. you only heard of the acronym isis for a few years. it is very dangerous. they want to kill us. we have to make sure they do not use a refugee program to bring people in under the umbrella of refugees. we want to take refugees but we've got to make sure our intelligence community and fbi are adequately vetting. not move ahead until they say they can be vetted. >> you have 30 seconds for rebuttal, if you would like. ms. judge: this country and particularly the state of iowa has been welcoming, a haven for refugees going back to the time from brought in the people

vietnam. we brought in bosnians. now, we have people in syria that are in danger of their lives. waylieve we need to find a that they can be brought here just as other were refugees have been brought here. we do have excellent surveillance. we do have a vetting process which is extremely vigorous. >> that is your time. senator grassley: we welcome refugees just like we welcome one million immigrants who come here illegally. we just want to make sure we do not have refugees coming here to kill us. >> we will address immigration in a few moments. i want to follow up, in respect to senator grassley's comment isis's in 36 countries. there is a u.s. act coalition of iraqi and kurdish forces trying ul retake modal in iraq -- mos

in iraq. i would like to know what you think about that action taken by the u.s. military. thejudge: regarding movement to retake the city mosul from isis, this is appropriate. it is being led by iraqi forces. we do have advisers in there. it is really quite a coalition. that is pushing back and read takingity -- rea that city. the way we should operate, give support to our allies to make sure the threat of isis is contained and eradicated. senator grassley: considering the situation that the president put us in by withdrawing troops in 2011, leaving a vacuum that isis

filled, i think what we are doing is about the best we can do. has all thet information. it doesn't seem likely have a strategy. we need our constitutional commander in chief who is the president with that responsibility to make sure he has a strategy. we need a strategy. our next question is about immigration. senator grassley, we will start with you. reform the effort to visa program to better protect americans who are often forced out of their jobs in place of less skilled foreign workers. does this prevent legal immigrants from calling iowa home and offering -- definitelyssley: not. it is a very legitimate program, set up in 1990. we did not have enough people educated in this country to do

professional jobs, they can be brought in. the problem is a lot of havenies bring people in, havetrain their workers -- their workers train them, and then fire their workers. sohave to reform the system we make sure there is a good toth effort of corporations find first workers in this country. if they can't, use the program. if we can get that sort of like senator durbin and i are working on, we will be more if theyven are needed, and only if they are needed, and do other things that will help the program worked the way it is supposed to. people ing to bring

and have your workers train them and then fire american workers. >> you have said it is foolish to even think about a mass deportation of all those people living in the u.s.. do you endorse a pathway to citizenship? what i endorse is a comprehensive immigration reform bill. there was a bill that was passed two years ago. it is sitting in the house of representatives. the republicans have refused to ill up.at b my opponent voted against it in the senate to read it gives us a path to get people who are working in our country as undocumented workers documented. to get them out of the shadows. to get them on the tax rolls. we need to get this done. there is no reason not to do it.

if there are portions of the bill we are not in agreement about, we have to have that discussion again once more. this is the obstruction, the deliberate obstruction, that is so frustrating to us. it has to stop. yes, i votedley: against it because it did not secure the border. we talk about securing the border as if it is just a mexico problem. it is not just a mexico problem. airports,oblem at our exit and entry. we need a biometric system to track people coming and going. half of the people are here overstaying the visas, not just crossing the border without papers. we also need interior enforcement. bottom line, we need to enforce the laws. ms. judge: there are provisions in this bill for border security.

grassley ifsenator in fact it was not adequate or lacking in some way, why is there not an attempt to perfect the bill? why can't we bring it up, have a decision, have a discussion and come to consensus on a way that we can deal with this problem? this growing problem of immigration in our country? >> i would like to ask a follow-up question. you talked about bringing people from out of the shadows. the green card process is very lengthy. what about people who have done it legally from day one? what is your message to them? message to them is thank you. we cannot ignore the fact that we have millions of people in our country that are not documented. they are working here. they came here because they knew

they had a job. ers needtheir employ to be held somewhat responsible as well. if we need them as a workforce and our state, we need to find a way to get them the proper documentation so they are working here legally and that is very different than being a resident and eventually being a citizen. does yourassley: question raised the issue of people who came here legally, being resentful for people who came here without papers? very definitely. in the last year or two, i have not heard as much about immigration in 2013 and 2014 when it came up at practically every one of my town meetings i have around iowa.

i did since a real resentment from people that stayed in line in their own country for a long time because we have quotas. they have to wait their turn. and they come here and they see other people here that violated our laws, crossing the borders without papers. if you check your clocks, we have hit the halfway mark. straightaway, any political that can be at best described as contentious, we will tackle bipartisanship. welcome back to the iowa u.s. senate debate, live from the campus of morningside college in sioux city. the next is the topic of the farm bill. >> my grandfather was a

norwegian farmer, and farming is so important to the state of iowa. do you think the federal government should provide farmers with a cost-sharing safety net program that manages risk and catastrophic disaster? have had some pretty good times in agriculture for the last two years. crop prices have been good, livestock prices have been good. this issue of the farm safety net has not been one people have given a lot of thought. however, things are not as robust as they were. we will have to address what sort of safety net is appropriate. we know we now have a crop insurance safety net in place. we really haven't had to test that out too much.

and i believe whatever we do, we have got to make certain we got a strong safety net under family farmers. people that actually live on our farms in iowa. we need to protect them. we cannot lose another generation of farmers and iowa. we have to keep them there. of the things i believe i want to do first in washington. >> how do we protect our farmers? senator grassley: we should have a safety net and the crop insurance is what you are talking about. that is the way it should be done. plan ahead. we have other disasters like you can have in agriculture. you can have an earthquake. we help, 100% disaster relief. you can have a hurricane. 100% disaster relief. you can have floods, and you

help them. it is 100% disaster. theyit comes to farmers, plan ahead. 95% of them in iowa. they pay for the crop insurance along with the taxpayers. it is good for the taxpayers, because if we did not have it, it would be 100 percent disaster relief like prior to 1990. >> any additional comments? just have to be very certain it works well. crop isis are good, corn was $3.13 today. that is on the edge of being a disaster for our farmers. as i said before, we have to certain those iowa family farmers, whether through this market -- >> final comments? senator grassley: too often,

people don't stop to think about everything a farmer goes through. they pay what they charge you for input. if you delivered and you wanted to sell it, you will take what they will give you. things, even of international politics and war. grain embargoes. not that the former has control over these. they ought to be able to have the crop insurance program they contribute to. >> would you support tax reform that lowers effective tax rates for farmers? i think, as we talk about tax reform, we really have to talk about that broadly. think it would be wise to single out a particular industry. including farming.

at tax reform. we need to be looking at making it more fair, more equitable for all of us. working families, small businesses. we need to close loopholes at the top that are preventing large multibillion dollar corporations from paying any taxes whatsoever. we need to close loopholes to make certain the wealthiest people in this country are in fact paying taxes. when we have a presidential candidate that is openly bragging about not paying taxes, it is very concerning. taxes.need to pay we enjoy living in this country but we went those taxes to be fair and equitable across the board. from those of us in the lower economic group to those of us, the wealthy. >> your view on comprehensive tax reform.

senator grassley: i think the estate tax should be done away with. that is passing on the farm from one to another. you cannot have tax reform just for farmers. you have to have it for people across the board. if my opponent is talking about thatthe people, farmers have had big inflation in their we got hillary clinton wanting to put a 65% tax rate on it. you also want them to reduce the exemption from $5 million down to $3.5 million. farmersgoing to cause to split up their operations and you will not have a farming operation. that would be the worst thing to get young people into farming. ms. judge: i agree with hillary

clinton on most issues. i'm sure that doesn't surprise anyone too much. estate tax andf the plan she has put forward, i do not agree with. i want to be very clear about that. i think it is unfair to farmers. i have been secretary of agriculture in the state read i understand a bit about land prices and actuation, the fact that you may be wealthy one day youit broke the next day if are in agriculture. the estate tax, i would not ever hillary's estate tax plan. senator grassley: i don't the guy need to say anymore. it would just kill young people getting into farming. really, it would not be taxation, it would be confiscation. question focuses on qualifications for office.

you both have lengthy political resumes. the judge, you served in iowa senate. senator grassley, how do you avoid stagnancy or complacency in washington dc after four decades? washington isey: an island surrounded by reality. get out of there. i come home every weekend. in a row, i have gone to every county to have at least one meeting in every county. polk county, one example. keep in touch with people. apresenting government is two-way street. i am one half of that process. she was a state senator, she was one half read the constituents are the other half. you have to have dialogue.

i make sure i am on top of things by having dialogue with my constituents so i can better represent them in washington dc. one thing to do is, when you are campaigning, don't overpromise. when you do promise something, carry it out. and always tell the truth because then you don't have to worry about what you told somebody else. >> you have 18 years in elected office, at the state level. how do you expect to bring a different approach to government in washington? ms. judge: i went to the state senate with zero experience in the state senate. i was able to work across party lines. did that very well. we were able to move a lot of important issues. i did work as a mediator for a number of years and i think that is a skill that is useful ringing people to consensus. outally would like to point

when my opponent talks about the need to get out of there, in washington, after having been there for 42 years, it is almost humorous. 99 townneed to have hall meetings to know what is going on in iowa. i live here. i am here. i have lived here my entire life. try to serve the people of this state to the best of my ability. i believe washington does change people. -- money, the power that senator grassley: all these

meetings, making the process of government work is something that is wrong about washington. that is kind of what i heard. think all you have to do is ask the people who know me and say that chuckd grassley is the same chuck grassley that went to the senate in 1980. suggestou mean to coming home is a bad thing? ms. judge: i think it is great he comes home. i just think it is strange he talks about the need to get out of washington and yet he has come back year after year and become a fixture in washington. being a big about deal in washington. there is a difference between

living and working in washington for over 40 years. living and working in iowa for that same time. a follow-up, can you deny senator grassley has influence? how do you plan to make gains with no seniority? iowa? you plan to benefit ms. judge: when the seniority is used for the benefit of your political party instead of the benefit of working families and isa, that seniority really not of great value. this is what we have seen happen. deliberateeen obstruction. we have already talked about the issue of the supreme court. we have also talked about the immigration bill and many other issues that are being obstructed right now.

the people know that and want to see progress. if you haven't been able to make the progress that needs to be made, it is time to come home and have someone else give it a try. why should people send you back to the senate? senator grassley: my friends say i don't smile enough. that makes me smile. to get things done in washington, you have to work across party lines. ce i have been chairman of the judiciary committee, 30 bills all bipartisan. byof them have been signed democratic president to read i am sponsoring criminals justice reform with a democratic whip.

i have had discussions with president obama on the bill he supports. if you don't want to take my word for it, go to the georgetown university study released maybe six months ago. they studied all 100 senators. top five.in the say getting things done has to be done in a bipartisan way, i have proved it. done.n get things 13 bills by a democratic president says it all. >> you appear to be itching for 30 seconds. i would just say the work load in the senate in the last year or two has been the lightest in years and years, probably since the eisenhower years. let's get back to work. let's talk about moving the economy. student loan debt, climate change.

clean air and clean water. we need to be talking about the issues that are important to people today. they are not being addressed. senator grassley: can i answer about the workload? >> you have 30 seconds. reidor grassley: senator basically shut down the united states senate. we had 18 role calls on amendments. 18 role calls on amendments. even democrats could not offer amendments. we said if we took over the andte, we will make it work perform. we had many more roll amendments. the first thing we called was bill toipeline create 20,000 jobs. the president vetoes and we could not override the veto.

there were other things we put on the president's desk that read would never have let go there. candidates promise to work across party lines. how can you reassure iowans you will keep this promise if elected? senator grassley: i just dated one record. what i said into my opening statement. $48 billion back in the federal treasury. in 2006, helping on medicaid for middle income people with high children's care. special needs kids. senator kennedy and i got the family opportunity act passed. congress had exempted itself from lots of legislation from 1938 to 1995. a senator from connecticut, a thecrat and i got

congressional accountability act so those laws cover us now. billd of medicare was a a democratr baucus, from montana and i worked on so senior citizens could get prescription drugs because they had never had it under medicare. those are just some of the pieces of legislation i have worked across party lines to do real things to help real people were abide by a principal that congress is not different than the rest of the people. >> how will you reassure iowans you will keep that promise? ms. judge: i believe that we need to be having discussion, whether we all agree or we do not is immaterial. you have to be willing to listen. you have to appreciate your

s point of view. when you understand their point of view, start looking for common ground. where you can meet and start moving forward. we have heard quoting a lot of history. from the senate. i am less concerned about history than i am about the issues on the minds of violence ns today.of iowa issues of getting the economy going. jobs.ng making education affordable. prescription drug costs. the environment, climate change. these are issues we are going to have to talk about and we will have to talk about them in a bipartisan way or else we will not take progress. senator grassley: issues you folks have brought appear are the same that, up in my -- that

sessions. my q&a you are asking about the issues constituents say they are interested in and i don't think my opponent should say they are not being discussed. are they being discussed on the floor of the senate? i know they are being discussed in iowa. i live here. i have been on this campaign since last march, talking to people just as you have and i hear the same things you do. i also hear a whole lot of frustration about the fact that they are not being discussed. washington is broken. washington is gridlocked. if we passed the highway bill, it could have been extended the first year of the obama administration, but it wasn't. we did away with no child left

behind, passed a new education bill. that has been reauthorized year after year after year. things like that. i should not take up all your time to go through a long list of things, but senate has produced -- but this senate has produced. >> that will do it for our questions from our panel. when we return, we get our closing statements. >> we have now come to the conclusion of our iowa u.s. senate debate. it is time for closing statements. each candidate will get two minutes for their closing statement. it will happen in the same order as the opening statements. the first closing statement tonight comes from patty judge. you have two minutes. ms. judge: thank you very much.

this time has flown by. i've enjoyed having the opportunity to answer your westerns. i have enjoyed having the opportunity to have a discussion with senator grassley also. i think you heard very clearly to points of view -- two points of view that we have been able to articulate, and i think the is that chuck grassley in 42 years has not really changed washington. washington probably has changed him. today, we see gridlocked and obstruction. we see great unhappiness, working families across this needsy know that there are not being addressed, and the need -- we need to make that work. talking about economic opportunity in our country. we went through a rough recession. from that, butng not as vigorously as we would like.

investing in infrastructure in the country, as a way to create good jobs. we need to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour over the next six years and start pumping money back into the economy. we need to get student loan debt under control. we need to let students start refinancing those debts and stretching the terms so that they can take art in our economy just as we have had that opportunity. we need to be talking about social security and making certain that it is there for people as they retire. they was promised when began their working careers. we need to be talking about the environment and climate change. we cannot deny it. science is real, climate change is real, and we have to take action. i want to thank you all. this has been a spirited a spiritedn and campaign. again, i am very proud to stand

before you. i ask for your vote. as we say good night, i want to also say god bless iowa and god bless the united states of america. >> thank you. senator grassley, you have two minutes. sen. grassley: thank you, you, viewers,ank thank you, audience. you have said many times tonight -- you have heard me say many fors tonight about our work islands. that is my work. you also heard a lot from my opponent. i think you heard a that represents an agreement with the failed policies of the last years, whether it is obamacare that she likes, whether it is epa regulations, she likes, or u.s.er it is waters of the , something that will be a real problem for farmers if it finally goes through. i work for iowans, as i told

you. senators from their individual states have to work for their constituents. let me repeat in three different ways. one, creating jobs. i talked about wind energy, because i never knew it would be the big thing that turned out to be when i got it passed in 1992, or exports and good export policy, or when i passed the false claims act, bringing in $48 billion to make sure taxpayers money is responsibly handled. i did not know that would bring in $48 billion, but it has really and the third but it really -- has. and the third responsibility, making sure you are safe. i have a responsibility to protect you as much as i can isis terrorists, whether it is over there or right here, domestically. remember, the fbi director said they are watching 900 people in the united states and at least one in every state. and finally, economic program

that will grow, not like the last eight years where everything has been stagnant. we need to create jobs. that's what i've done in my will continue these three things if i am reelected. finally, i ask you for your vote. >> thank you, senator. unfortunately, that is our time. we would of course like to thank our two guest, senator charles grassley andarles patty judge, for a spirited debate. >> we also want to thank lindsay media for televising -- quincy media for televising this debate. >> and a big thank you for the staff at morningside college for hosting the debate. to thanknally, we want you, the viewers, for watching. please get out and vote area at night. -- please get out and vote. good night. [applause]

click's this weekend on american history tv on c-span3. saturday morning from 9:00 eastern until afternoon. >> the empire and its commonwealth last 4000 years, waswill still say this their finest hour. >> where life for the 33rd international churchill conference in washington, dc, focusing on the prime ministers friends and contemporaries. --akers include historians 1941 to 1945. ,ater on saturday, the justice state senator and musician for collins talk about the spanish mission, the alamo at the festival in austin.

>> my impressions were this group of people knew they were going to die but they went. crockett went. there was something very noble, very romantic. it wasn't quite as black and white. that is one of the things i think would be good in this day and age is put it into context. clock,ay evening at the -- sunday evening at 6:00 -- >> the men looked at this and realized if the kernel and the brigadier can take it, i can take it. >> we visit the macarthur memorial in norfolk, virginia, learn about the life of douglas macarthur. at 8:00 --

>> the leaders served as conscious in chief -- conscience in chief with their moral compass locked on true north. when times get tough or when no one is looking. >> the author explains his 10 commandments for presidential leadership. what they are and provides examples of presidents who excelled at each one. go to c-span.org. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television company and it is brought to you today meyer cable provider -- by your cable provider. announcer: freshman congressman john katko represents new york's 24th congressional district, which includes the city of syracuse. on tuesday, he debated challenger calling deacon, the director of senator kirsten

gillibrand's regional office. this is the first of three planned televised debates in the >> hello and welcome to our time warner cable news debate between the candidates for the 24th congressional district. -- geoi am just than it ff bennet. this seat has changed hands every two years since 2008. it is currently held by republican congressman john katko. >> the challenger is colleen deacon. each candidate gets a minute for an opening statement at a minute for a closing statement. in between, we will be asking questions about local and national issues. those are limited to one minute. rebuttals are limited to 45 seconds. re-rebuttals will be allowed at the discretion of moderators, and those are limited to 30

seconds. geoff: let's get started. the order of opening statements was chosen randomly earlier. up first is mistaken. colleen deacon. ms. deacon: i appreciate the opportunity to share more about myself and campaign. for the last three years, i worked in kirsten gillibrand's office, so i have really been rolling up my sleeves, building relationships, solving problems, and fighting hard for the people of this district for a long time. i grew up in syracuse. i was born and raised in the city. after i graduated from college, i had a son who did not have the option of health care. i had to quit my job a few days before he was born, so i know how hard it is for emily's who are struggling. and i want to be a voice at the table where there has not been a voice before. i want to go to congress to protect social security and medicare.

i want to go to congress to fight hard for the middle class. nobody is going to work harder than me. nobody is going to be stronger than me, and no one will be a better representative to the 24th district than i am. i am glad to have an opportunity to talk today, and i look forward to the discussion. >> thank you, congressman katko. rep. katko: i left my job to run for congress. iran because, like many of you out there, i was sick and tired of partisan gridlock that seemed to grip that institution. i wanted to be part of the solution, not the problem. respectfully over the last two , years, that's exactly what i did. over the last two years i have , become one of the most independent members in all of congress. over the past two years i passed , more than 15 bills and had six of them signed into law by a democratic president. that's more bills passed the an any freshman in his term. i worked on many major issues in new york. the heroin epidemic. i worked on national security issues and rolling back the common core mandate.

there is so much more i want to address, and with your vote on i november 8, hope i can do that. i look forward to the discussion tonight. > thank you, congressman katko. let's head to questions. our first question is for mr. deacon. like many other cities, syracuse has had black lives matter protests and other peaceful demonstrations to call for police reforms. do you think changes in policing are needed, and do you think the black lives matter movement is helping those reform efforts? ms. deacon: thank you very much for that question. i look at it like this. as the mother of a 13-year-old son, i can't imagine what it is like for so many parents to worry about her child going to a store or riding in a car with friends. i also can't imagine what it's like to have my son put on the uniform everyday and served in the line of duty. it must be hard for parents to understand that this is a real

situation. we have to address it. we can't just retreat to our corners and stand by our thoughts. we have to come together as a society, as a community and work , together to address this issue for good. we need to have a conversation that includes everybody, and really is an open dialogue. we need to do more on the federal level to provide resources so that we can help our police officers, provide them with the training they need, give them resources to hire new people so they can learn about the communities they are policing. i think a discussion is needed so we can address this moving forward. nick: should those resources include body cameras warm by -- for instance, worn by police officers? ms. deacon: absolutely. we need to provide body cameras for our police officers and hire more officers. anything we can do, i am very supportive of. katko?congressman

rep. katko: the last 16 years before i went to congress, i worked in syracuse. i ran the circus gang violence task force. i had a birds eye view of the problems that plague our city. it's just like every urban area across the country. extreme poverty and officers who can't do their jobs. are there things officers can do better? of course. i know that police officers have job training. we need to continue to do that. one of the things we need to do for sure, and i agree with ms. deacon, we need to have body cameras for all officers. i supported a pilot program for the syracuse police department to get body cameras. we are going to continue to support those across the country. i think body cameras might solve a lot of the narrative. as far as black lives matter goes, to the extent that they are raising issues about poverty and the problems with law enforcement nationwide i guess , that's ok. i want to make sure there is respect for law enforcement. it's not just black lives matter. all lives matter. police officers lives matter as well as the lives of the citizens. quickly, --llow up

nick: to follow up quickly you're a former federal , prosecutor, but there have been questions about whether local prosecutors are best equipped to handle cases when police are involved in the depths of unarmed civilians. do you believe prosecutors at the local level should be handling those questions? rep. katko: i believe it is a case-by-case basis. if it is a federal jurisdiction, they should get with the local prosecutors, like i did for 20 years. i routinely work with local prosecutors on the cases i have worked on, and we always decide for the good of the case and for the good of the jurisdiction where the case should go. so i think it depends on the , case-by-case matter. nick: ok, thanks, congressman. geoff: ongoing unrest in the middle east, particularly in the civil war, has given opportunity for terrorist organizations such as the islamic state group to operate and gain strength. a question for you is what more should the obama administration be doing to defeat isis overseas? ms. deacon: we have to make sure we are keeping america safe. that is our number one priority.

not on at home, but abroad. we need to work with our allies on the ground, work with our coalition partners, make sure they have the tools and training they need to be able to not only contain, but eliminate the threats of isis. under the obama administration, there have been 40,000 airstrikes. we have been able to reclaim 45% of the land that isis has taken over and we have been able to , take out the number one online recruiter that isis has been using to recruit people to to join their terrorist organization. we have to continue to do more. we have to work with our partners on the ground, work with iraqi security forces and the kurds to make sure they have everything they need so we can support them to finally eliminate isis for good. >> congressman? rep. katko: here's a fact. the obama administration was one of the root causes of isis's ation allmetastasis asia over the middle east. in 2000 when we pulled out of iraq, it left a vacuum that allowed isis to rise up, take all of the territory. obama has been a disaster on

this issue, and so has hillary clinton, because she was secretary of state at the time. i have appointed a task force to deal with this issue. i issued a detailed report other freshman congressman with 50 recommendations, more than half have become law. they are on their way to becoming law. in addition to that, i agree that we need to increase the bombings in the middle east. we need to work with our partners. we need to get our partners to trust us again, and we need to continue training their forces to do a better job than they are doing now. geoff: are there any circumstances in which you would favorite employing a significant number of ground troops to syria? rep. katko: not unless generals told us that is exactly what we need. i think what we need to do now is continue what we are doing. i was over there two years ago myself in baghdad as a part of that task force and i spoke to , the actual generals in iraq, and i saw plumes of smoke in the

distance. they were launching mortars towards baghdad. they told me what they need is troops to train iraqi forces to do it themselves. we are never going to fix the problem in the middle east by going over there and intervening ourselves. we need to get them to fight for themselves and support them like we are doing now. the more we support them, the better. i have not heard one general say we need a full-fledged invasion of u.s. forces. this is something that is very personal to me as well, because i have a 20-year-old son serving in the army right now as a senior navy seal. i take that very seriously. before we have boots on the ground, we need to exhaust are other options. geoff: ms. deacon, is there a scenario in which you would support combat troops in a direct combat role in syria? ms. deacon: boots on the ground is the last solution. we have to make sure we are solving this problem before we deploy and he went to the middle east to solve this problem. my father was a veteran. my two uncles were in vietnam. i saw firsthand what these wars due to families. -- do to families.

we can't do this with this current situation. i would not be supportive of anything unless it was the last possible option that we had on the table. you know i think we should knock , on the door before we can get t in.fore we kick i that's where i stand. i think america can do everything we can to work with our allies, work with our generals, get the intelligence we need, and continue to solve this problem before we put anybody over there in harm's way. geoff: the fbi said there are active isis-related investigations in all 50 states. in new york state alone, 18 individuals have been charged with isis-related offenses. that is according to the george washington university center for cyber and homeland security. congressman katko, how it should federal officials address that specific security challenge? rep. katko: am glad you asked that. i was head of the foreign fighter task force. as a freshman, i was assigned head of the task force, and i

had four republicans and three democrats working with me in a bipartisan matter. we should be working with local and state counterparts, along with the federal joint terrorist task force's which are in each state across the nation. there is more we can do to get them to work together and have a more seamless transition of the information. let us not forget this is the , seminal threat of our time. during the course of this campaign, i have made that an issue with my opponent, because she seems to not have made it a priority during the course of her campaign. if you go to her website right now, there is still nothing on this issue on her website. that is something the american people should take into consideration when deciding who they want to work for them in congress. isis is the most existential threat we have faced in this country today. we are at the highest threat level we have been that since 9/11. on new year's eve in rochester, and isis plot to shoot up a new year's eve party was disrupted. it is a priority and i work on

everything will day. i am proud of the work we have done on that. geoff: ms. deacon, he invoked your name. do you care to respond? ms. deacon: i find it funny that john katko says i have not made this a priority, because he deceptively edited a tape of me talking about isis since december of 2014. it is something i have been talking about for a year now since i have been on this campaign. it is foolish to say i don't make this a priority. i just wanted to add to your question, john katko basically just said nothing about keeping america safe. i think we should enact the know -- no-buy, no-fly legislation, which congressman katko does not support. it is a bipartisan piece of legislation that means if you are on the no-fly list, you should not be able to purchase a gun. i think it is commonsense policy that we could enact right now to keep americans safe. i think it is so important that we can implement everything we fingertips to do everything we can to make sure terrorists not infiltrate our communities and not have

situations that could occur on our soil. geoff: congressman katko, just to respond to that? rep. katko: to suggest i am light on gun crime is preposterous. i drafted a bill about no-fly, no-buy that was six months before the orlando incident. if you think i am light on crime go ask the 14 people that are , violent criminals who are suffering mandatory sentences that i have prosecuted. or go ask the city gang 160 defendants in the city of syracuse who were menacing the streets. i am a leader of violent crime prosecution. i have been commended by republican and democratic presidents for my efforts, so it is preposterous to think i would be for putting guns in the hands of terrorists. >> on that issue would you vote , for a bill, i know there are multiple versions of that bill would you vote for a bill that , would restrict people who are on that terror watch list from obtaining a firearm? rep. katko: like i just said, i authored one such bill. there is a minor difference between the two. it is a 72 hour waiting period,

72 hour waiting period the person applies for a , gun who is not on the terrorist watch list, they cannot get the gun. you know what, let's keep in mind, kennedy was on a no-fly list. there are thousands upon thousands of americans that are mistakenly on a no-fly list. mine just assures that in a 72 hour period we make sure they've , got the right guy. for me just say i do not support y, it isno-bu preposterous. ms. deacon: you said to yourself that you are less than 1000 u.s. citizens on the no-fly list. that you would rather protect the rights of 80,000 foreigners, who we watch when they get on a plane but you want them to be in , -- be able to purchase a gun? that makes no sense. rep. katko: absolutely not. i have been protecting law-abiding citizens who are accused of being a terrorist. it happens everyday. i know from my time running the tsa subcommittee in all my security from the briefings i , get on a daily basis. it is a problem we are trying to

fix. nick: we will have to move on, unfortunately. this is for congressman katko. new yorkers have seen an increase in their bills, partially because the state is moving to bolster nuclear power. the move is to preserve hundreds of jobs. should taxpayers be bearing responsibility for shoring up nuclear power in new york? rep. katko: it is a cost-benefit analysis. given this situation, i think yes. , it is not just hundreds of jobs being saved in new york state there are thousands. , my district has the second-largest number of nuclear power plants of any district in the country. if you do the math, those couple thousand jobs as power plants generate, over $200 million a year in salary alone. that does not include the hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue of spinoff jobs which are related to it. if the nuclear industry of -- evaporated in new york state, you would have a huge problem and it would cause the next financial increase in rates in

new york state. by putting nuclear power in for -- in firm footing not only does , it ensure jobs are protected, but it also ensures that we have clean energy. so, if we want to get to clean energy we want to leave this , environment a better place than our parents said, you have to understand until we get to the point where they are sustainable on their own -- it's 100% carbon free emissions, and that's what we need to think about. nick: what do you say to businesses that are looking to potentially moved to new york, look at what their utility bills might be under this agreement and just say it is too expensive , to move here? rep. katko: that is a legitimate concern, but there is a time of that daytime time of waste and abuse and fraud in the new york state government as well. governmentederal before we pass any bill now, we , always make sure we find some place to pay for it. we should do the same in new york state. we can find savings in other programs. lord knows we have bloated bureaucracy in new york state. it can put thousands of people

out of jobs in a hard-pressed area of the country where you have carbon free emissions from nuclear power plants, does not seem like a good idea to me. ms. deacon: i don't think we should be putting taxes and burdens on the backs of middle-class families or our businesses. when i worked in the senator's office, there was discussion about how one of our power companies was going to be charging an extra rate hike during the warmer months, because they felt they did not collect the money during the cold months. i asked my senator to look into this, to investigate if this rate hike was legitimate and if it was something consumers should have had to pay. that is the kind of person i want to be when i go to congress, to make sure we are congress, to make sure we are doing everything we can so that people who use energy, who need to be able to have their homes with air-conditioners on, are not paying exorbitant rates just so we can balance one over the other. nick: do you consider nuclear power clean energy? do you think it is one that

falls under this rubric of being a renewable clean energy? ms. deacon: we had nuclear energy in this district. i don't support building new nuclear energy, but i agree that until we are able to transition off of fossil fuels that we -- and into renewable energy that we should be using nuclear , energy right now. the issue with nuclear energy is that after the power plants close, then you are left with the waste material, and that is something we need to address. the currently right now i think , it is something we need to have on the grid to be able to provide energy for people. nick: if you were in congressman katko's position at the time that fitzpatrick was facing the trouble that it was, would you have supported an agreement that would have provided a subsidy? ms. deacon: yes. the bottom line is this. we are talking about high paying jobs at an energy source we cannot afford to lose. both of those coupled together, we had to work to get something done to be able to keep this plan to open. keep the jobs in place. i would have worked very hard if i had been in congress, had i been a representative of this

district to make sure we brought , to every idea to the table to fix this moving forward. rep. katko: the fact of the matter was she was a representative of this district. she was a point person for senator gillibrand for six years. during that time, the issue of the solvency of the nuclear power plants came up and she did not do anything about it. i went to the rallies at fitzpatrick, and she was noticeably absent. i have not heard or talk much about it. i rolled up my sleeves. i worked with fitzpatrick employees. i worked with the governor's office on a daily basis, and i got them to come together and understand the issues from all sides, and i played a key world -- a key role in helping that plant stay open, keeping those jobs in a very impoverished area of our country. i am very proud of that. the nuclear industry is a part of what new york state's energy fabric should be. we need to protect it as best as we can. >> i want to move on, but mystique and, do you -- miss

respondthe want to -- do you want to respond? ms. deacon: when the fitzpatrick situation happened, that was my last week of work, so congressman katko has his facts a little bit wrong, which is a little unnerving, since as a representative i hope he does not take a lazy stance to everything he does. second of all, when i was in the senator's office that week, i don't remember congressman katko reaching out to me to talk about this issue. as someone who claims to be so bipartisan, i don't think he worked with me at all or tried to get me to attend any of these meetings. nick: ok. we have to move on. geoff: ms. deacon, the next congress will likely play a role in fixing the affordable care act. just yesterday, the obama administration announced double-digit price hikes for some obamacare plans. the question is the obvious one, what should be done to fix it? ms. deacon: i do support the affordable care act. as somebody who did not have health insurance at the time, i know how hard it can be to not have health insurance, so we have to do everything we can to include more people to help them get the preventative care we

-- they need. i think the affordable care act is a great start. we need to obviously improve it. i am happy to see they have eliminated insurance companies from canceling insurance on those who have a pre-existing condition. they have allowed students to stay on their parents' insurance until they are 26. and they have provided a marketplace for people to buy insurance. but we do need to make it better. we need to make sure it is affordable, that people could save quality health care that they deserve. yesterday, when they talk about the hikes, the other part of the story is that federal subsidies will increase with those hikes. we need to make sure those -- rise to make sure it is affordable to everybody. rep. katko: she did not tell you how to fix it, but i will. the bottom line is it is a broken system. i agree with my opponent that it it\ is a good thing that americans have more health insurance. we cannot go back to a time

where americans do not have the option to have health insurance. but let us face it obamacare is , not working. i would like to say i had parked part in forcing a proposal to come to the table. i stood up to my party when they would have bills to repeal obamacare with no replacement. i gladly stood up to them, because that's what independent leaders in congress do. the proposal out there now is a proposal to basically have a more market-based solution, where you allow insurance companies to compete across state lines. you do such things that will make a big difference in a way that obamacare is working. we will also work with prescription drug rates, because that's another major driving of the economic crisis. let us face it obamacare is not , working in its current form and we need to fix it. , geoff: let's move on to congressman katko. planned parenthood funding is once again an issue in this race. we are also seeing more talk about abortion in the presidential race.

donald trump says he will appoint pro-life judges to the supreme court, and he ultimately expects the issue to go back to the states. hillary clinton wants to keep roe v wade to stay in place, and she is calling for a repeal of the measure that blocks the use of medicaid funding for procedure. congressman, you voted to defund planned parenthood despite saying you would not do so in 2014 when you are running. can you explain that vote and also tell us what new york should do if roe v wade is actually overturned? rep. katko: sure. i am glad to have the opportunity to talk about this, because there has been hundreds of thousands of dollars spent to scare the heck out of women it on my position on this. my position is quite simple. i was presented with evidence of possible wrongdoings by planned parenthood nationwide. based on the evidence i saw, i voted to temporarily shift money , not defund planned parenthood, it shift money to community-based health clinics for women's health care that lets women's health care continue. i have also been a champion of

women's health care rights. a champion for spending in women's health care issues. my mother has suffered from breast cancer and for anyone to , suggest that i would not be for funding women's health care is reprehensible, and that's what those commercials suggested. as more as the supreme court goes, i don't think we should have litmus tests. i think that is part of the problem for the supreme court process. we need to nominate people to the supreme court who have integrity first, integrity second, and integrity third. and of course, qualifications. that is what we should do for the supreme court. nick: i am sure ms. deacon wants to respond, but first, donald trump is wrong when he suggests he should be appointing pro-life judges, as he calls them? rep. katko: i think having a litmus test is wrong, so in both cases, they are both wrong. having a litmus test polarizes people. that is a key issue. nick: and if roe v wade were to be repealed, would there be a measure that is approved in new york that would preserve abortion rights? rep. katko: i think that is up

to the majority of votes of people. majority rules. whatever the majority of people feels appropriate for their district. ms. deacon: john katko, when he ran in 2014, he promised he would not defund planned parenthood. since he has been in office, he has done that four times. , for him to tap dance around this issue that he was presented with videos, false evidence that was completely not real, and the actual gentleman who did record these videos is now indicted for doing what he did, so he based his evidence on false material. i don't want as a congressman, who can't look at the evidence presented and wait for a decision to be made before they decide to defund planned parenthood. he wants to take away health care rights for women. he voted four times to defund planned parenthood. i think this is a serious issue, and women need to know he went back on his campaign promise. he just said having integrity is key. i think having integrity on this issue is key as well. >> i do want to go back to

congressman taco. nick: do you support repealing the hyde amendment? ms. deacon: i do. i do support repealing the hyde amendment. i think it negatively impacts poor and low income women, and we have to do everything we can to make sure women have the health care they deserve, no matter what their income is. geoff: congressman katko? rep. katko: you can beat the drum all you want, but i told you what my position was. i made sure that the funding was for women's health, and i always will. that is the bottom line, period. nick: we are going to move on. the next question is for ms. deacon. cities like syracuse have struggled to maintain their aging water and sewer and -- infrastructure. one solution is to call for local government consolidation. is this a solution that would make local government more affordable? ms. deacon: i am glad you brought this up. i think infrastructure is one of the biggest issues we face. i have been talking about this my entire campaign. our roads, bridges, waters, and sewer pipes are crumbling everywhere.

not just unique to the 24th district. when i go to congress, i am excited for the opportunity to vote on a package that includes a huge investment of infrastructure. we will be able to put people to work. i think it is a great opportunity for us to be able to fix what we have and provide opportunities for people. as far as the city's infrastructure and the consolidation i did read the , draft on consolidation that came out back in the spring, and i don't think it had enough detail to be able to say what would work and what did not work. there were not any numbers that -- or dollar figures that matched what the proposals were. until we have more information, then i can make a decision on what will be best and if that would actually work, and if that would help fix our infrastructure. again when i go to congress, i , want to fight hard to make sure i am bringing dollars back to fix our epicenter here, not only in syracuse, but in all parts of the 24th district. nick: to follow-up up, how should we spend that money on the structure? should we get that money?

should it be through raising taxes, debt? some investments are in the trillions of dollars that are needed nationally. rep. katko: right now. you can borrow money at historically low interest rates. if you look at the long-term, not as writing a check today, but look over 10 years as far as putting investments into our country, putting hundreds of thousands of people to work which will add dollars to the economy. it will pay for itself in the long run. that is what is wrong with john and his republican party. they don't look at it as investments. they don't look at it as way to put people to work and provide opportunity. they just look at it as spending, and they think spending is bad. in fact, it would be a great investment for our future. nick: congressman? rep. katko: she talks about me not wanting to get involved in spending. she must have missed the fact that i was the leading negotiator on the highway bill, the first long-term fix in 10 years. i went to congress, i asked to be on the transportation and infrastructure committee, and in so doing, i managed to get myself into a lead role on the first long-term highway bill in a decade. that bill increased spending by

10%. it provides billions upon billions of dollars to states to fund projects. for example, the interstate 81 project, i advocated that be not only part of the bill but be considered a high-priority corridor, which is because of my advocacy. it put thousands of people to work right away. you might have seen some of the fruits of the bill, and a lot more is coming. with respect to water infrastructure i supported a , state green water revolving fund. by the way, increased spending in the highway bill and the funds for the clean water revolving fund were funded by other parts of the country. instead of just trying to say we are going to borrow more money, i say be efficient with your money. that's what we did with the highway bill and the clean water revolving fund. nick: just a follow-up on that, can cuts go far enough? is there some revenue the needs to be raised by funding, borrowing, or raising taxes? geoff: -- rep. katko: i think with $19 trillion in debt, it

should be the last resort. we are not at the last resort yet. i think we should try to focus on the clean water reviving statehat has given the bloc grants and allows the state to have more money to use for clean water funds. we can find other areas for cuts in government. until such time there is no more fraud and waste in government, i think we should find every piece of fraud and waste in government that we can before we resort to borrowing more money. nick: before we move on, this is kind of a yes or no answer -- do you think onondaga county and syracuse should propose some -- pursue some sort of merger or consolidation? ms. deacon: i think we need to have more data to be able to decide. i read the draft report, and there was not enough information to be able to say whether or not this was a good decision. it did not say whether money would be saved. it did not have any information at all. rep. katko: i completely agree with her on that one. geoff: ok, all right. it let us move on. nick: ms. deacon, this summer congress passed legislation to deal with the heroin and opioid

epidemic, but there is question over whether or not it is being treated as a public health epidemic or as a law enforcement issue. some house republicans have her more of a focus on helping police crackdown heroin distribution. what's the right approach? ms. deacon: i'm glad you mentioned this. i think it is a health epidemic, and we need to make sure we are addressing it as a health epidemic. no community is immune from this terrible, terrible drug, and we have to do what we can to make are providing the resources to help people. we should be working with our law enforcement agencies, making sure they have the training and tools and the ability to deal with people who are overdosing, having narcan on them, and doing everything they can to get these drugs off the streets. at the same time, we need to work with our medical community, making sure they have guidelines in place so they are not overprescribing these drugs. and we are being proactive about it, not necessarily reactive,

but not making it so more and more people are becoming addicted. we also need to work to make sure we have treatment facilities available to those who are addicted. we have 90 methadone clinics, only 10 our upstate. -- 10 are upstate. 40 counties in new york state do not have access to clinics, and every county is not immune from this. we need to make sure we have places for people, and on the federal level, we need to provide resources so families can deal with this issue and tackle it for good. geoff: congressman -- nick: do you mind really quickly, ms. deacon, state injection sites, what do you think of that? ms. deacon: i want to see how it works. that's before i would comment on it. obviously, they have not been in use in new york state, but until we do, let's see how it goes before i have a thought on that. rep. katko: thank you. for 20 years, i was a federal organized crime prosecutor. during that time, i was going after cartel level drug

traffickers throughout this great land of ours. i have never seen anything like heroine. heroin is killing our children at a record pace. not just the inner-city, all over the place. in congress, i held six detailed drug town halls about this issue. i could get educated. i went to congress and fought for them. i was instrumental in having a key role in comprehensive addiction recovery act. i did that because i looked at people who lost their something to heroine overdose. mightou called someone back, you talk to them and look them in the eye, and he tell you about the pain they went through, i can only tell you i would walk through walls for them and anybody who is going through that terrible epidemic. what do we do? it is a three-pronged approach. it is enforcement, prevention, and treatment. the thing might opponents at about prevention treatment, absolutely, but you also need the enforcement leg. this is a good first step to get more money flowing to communities, more beds to people for treatment, and more money

for prevention, but we have to have a law enforcement component as well and that is , what we are working on. it is a good start. i am very proud to be a part of the solution to that problem. geoff: just a follow-up there , has been concerns raised about narcan and the availability of that, primarily because people who are overdosing are revived by this and sometimes overdose once again. has narcan become too much of a problem for this issue? i know it is a life-saving thing, but also it has come under scrutiny. rep. katko: it is never a problem when you're saving some of life or providing someone who is overdosed. but you are absolutely right. police officers in auburn, they have issued someone narcan and had gone back to the house several hours later and gotten -- they are at it again which is , stunning. that is how bad the grip is. narcan is by no means the magical elixir. it is simply the means to revive someone who is dead. we should not eliminate it, but we need to make sure we have the other things that my opponent and i have talked about.

prevention and treatment and law enforcement component, which i talked about. geoff: the next question, moving right along to congressman katko, outside groups have spent heavily on this race, as well as congressional races in upstate new york. nick: and a lot of this is because of the citizens united supreme court decision. should a constitutional amendment be approved that restrict or diminishes the role of money in politics? rep. katko: yes absolutely. ,i think based on what the , supreme court has said, they not just in citizens united, but other supreme court cases they , believe that donating to campaigns is essentially a first amendment right. without a constitutional amendment, we are not going to be able to fix the problem. i have been very honored by the support in this race not just from traditional groups for a republican, but but labor unions, environmental groups for , example. i have had support from across the board. i am honored and humbled to have that support. i also recognize it is a problem. there has been a lot of money coming on my behalf and my

opponent's behalf. it is part of what it is today. i think my opponent would agree with me today that a constitutional amendment is the way to go. nick: to be clear, do you think that giving money to a political campaign falls under free speech, the first amendment protection? rep. katko: under the current iteration and decisions i have read i think it is no question , that it is free speech. the question is whether we want to have an amendment to fix that, and i think we have to. geoff: ms. deacon? ms. deacon: i absolutely think we have to get money out of politics. the special interest money the , dirty money coming in, even in our district alone, the attack ads. this is not how you elect representatives with all of just whoever has the most money to say whatever they want. i have been talking about this since i have been on the campaign trail. my opponent is somebody who might say we should have an amendment, but he is not that she does not support any of the bills introduced on this subject. he is the seventh highest recipient of tax dollars and special interest dollars in congress. no-flyoned the no-buy,

piece of legislation earlier, and everything he does not support it is because he has received thousands of dollars from the gun lobby. i think it is obvious that we need to get money out of politics. we need to have donors disclose who they are and not have secret money, special money coming in to any district. nick: congressman, i want to get back to you, but first, ms. deacon do you agree or disagree , with any of the things that some of the super pac's have been saying about congressman katko? ms. deacon: everything we have put out on my campaign has been his words. he said donald trump has good principles. nick: but the super pac ads, the ads run on your behalf, your campaign -- ms. deacon: we are not affiliated with those ads, but from what i have seen, it just uses congressman katko's words. congressman katko says donald trump has good principles. congressman katko says he is supporting donald trump because he is concerned about his congressional race. that is only using his own words

to let the voters know who he is. rep. katko: own words to let the voters know who he is. rep. katko: when your way but she says with respect to the campaign finance laws and the money coming in the campaign, keep in mind one of immutable fact. incumbent year, but she outraised me last quarter. keep that in mind. she raised more money than me last time with many groups. bottom line, like i said, we do need a constitutional amendment to get this under control. i absolutely, 100%, believe that. as for the outside ads, i think you know that i have never endorsed donald trump. she said those were my words. i've never endorsed him. i never said i was going to vote for him, but i'm not going to. despite that, her ads are trying to say otherwise. so, you know, just keep in mind, i have great faith that you will sift through the nonsense and understand what this campaign is really all about. nick: congressman, you have been on the record saying you do not support donald trump, but who are you going to be voting for? rep. katko: i have not decided yet. funny, i know it is not going to be hillary clinton or donald trump. i think they are two very

seriously flawed candidates. i picked up the paper today and the county executive said the same thing. she does not know who she is going to vote for yet. i don't think we are alone. i think a lot of americans are going, "is this the best we have?" they are frustrated like i am. i have not decided. nick: are you going to skip over that race entirely? you may not vote at all? rep. katko: i will either write in a candidate or vote for a third-party candidate. nick: ms. deacon, anything you would like to respond to? ms. deacon: no. now, i mean, i think it is very clear that john katko receives a very high amount of special interest money, and frankly, he's got very false, misleading ads about me on television. i mean he selectively edited a , portion of my words to make it sound like i was saying something i wasn't, which is very dishonest. it is misleading the voters, and frankly i think the voters are , deserving better to have somebody in congress who actually wants to run on his record, but instead is just attacking me. nick: congressman, we started with you and can end with you on this topic. rep. katko: it is a fact that

she has not been able to articulate anything right for the party. those were her own words on this interview with this very television program. it's a fact that she could not articulate any planned with -- any plan with respect to isis or any detail with respect to isis, and it is a fact that she said, "isis, i don't have a plan." those were her words. they were not edited. i will let you people out there judge whether or not those words were authentic. geoff: ms. deacon, you served for six years as a top aide in central new york for kirsten gillibrand. this will be your first elected office. why should voters in this district trust you in that role? ms. deacon: thank you for that question. i appreciate the opportunity. i have worked in this district for the last six years, rolling up my sleeves in her office, and six years before that in the mayor's office. i know how government works on all levels. i know the potential we have. you know i have worked with , small businesses to help them cut through red tape. i have worked with an hvac company to get them a waiver they deserved so they could

continue to produce their product here. i have worked to stop bad trade deals from happening. a steel company in auburn was facing steel dumping from other countries, where they could not compete. we worked to investigate this and look into this and stop it. i have worked with our veterans to help connect them with local job opportunities. these are the things i have done here on the ground, and i want to continue to fight hard for the people of this district. i understand the needs of the community. i was actually just down at southwest community center talking about the fema flood map. these are issues i have been involved in and will continue to be involved in throughout my time when i am in office. as something you has faced a challenge, safety struggle i , know what it is like for so many families. i want to be a voice at the table where there has not been a voice before. as somebody who just paid off her student loans i know what it , is like for some many people who are graduating from college with student loan burdens on their backs and limited job opportunities. i want to go to congress and fight hard as a champion for this region. geoff: congressman, you have

been among a handful of republicans who have split from party leaders on rollcall vote, but if democrats split, your vote will become more important than ever and pressure will increase upon you by gop leaders. why should voters in this district expect and trust that you will not break under pressure? rep. katko: because i have prosecuted the most violent criminals. i had to move my family out of my house. i had to move my family out of puerto rico as a special prosecutor down there. despite that, i never wavered. i never backed down. that's why it's easy for me to stand up to my party and tell them, "no, this is the way i am going to vote." i have done it repeatedly. that is why i am one of the most independent voices in congress. keep in mind one immutable fact. my opponent has been involved in politics pretty much her entire adult career. i have been involved in politics two years. in those two years, i have gotten more done than when she was involved at a local level.

things that impacted new york ande like getting research develop an tax made permanent to stimulate business, making sure the highway bill is going to generate thousands of jobs in central new york and making sure the trade bill does not continue to ruin us, like it has with the nafta deal with the manufacturing jobs. i have a proven track record. with my opponent, you have some possibilities, but you have with me a proven track record. my question to you is why change that? geoff: we just heard an indictment of your resume. what's your response? ms. deacon: i don't now how he quantifies what he is saying. i have gotten a lot accomplished in this district. if you want to talk about legislation, i was not in congress. i was never a federal congressperson from this district. so for him to say i have not , gotten anything done is just completely false. i mean, like i said i have , worked on the ground. i worked with fema when a school district had an issue with relocating a school and fema not allowing them to build a new -- in a new location.

i will with fema to get them the waivers they needed so they could rebuild after a flood. i worked with the city of syracuse to make sure they had the funding they needed for the lead paint issue in the 24th district. i have been working on the ground for a long time. i worked to make sure that the bird's eye workers at the birdseye factory, that we secured taa funding trade , adjustment assistance funding, so that workers could be retrained. for john just say i don't have a proven track record is completely false and dishonest. rep. katko: with respect to lead paint, for example, they lost funding in the county, the state, rather, and now i have tried to help with that by supporting grants. the county got one that is coming back to the city. we have supported the city's grant and they did not get the funding. we are going to continue to work on that. regarding fema, it has been laid out my lap at the last minute about the fema flood mapping of the city of syracuse. you have been there for 10 years and nothing happened. ,it continued, and all of a sudden, it's my fault.

you did it for 10 years. you did nothing about it, and now it's at my feet, or you tried to do something about it and you failed. either way, it did not happen. nick: just a follow-up on that, excuse me, really quick, just you know, working as a regional rep in eight district office, as you know a lot of this is , constituent services. how has what ms. deacon has done working with constituents not prepared her for a job in the house of representatives? rep. katko: let's face it. the economy got worse and that period of time. we have a lead paint problem going on. those are a few examples. she cannot have her cake and eat it too. she cannot sit there and say, i am qualified to run for congress because i worked with senator gillibrand before i worked for the city of syracuse. for 12 years, she has been a professional in politics. i have been in politics for two years and got a lot more done. it is easy to talk about what

you are doing, but you have to look at her track record when she was working at the senator's office. for example the watershed issue , is a huge thing. we have been meeting for two years on that issue, and she is nowhere to be found, and all of a sudden, she shows up at a press conference a couple of weeks ago saying i am not even involved. that shows that she does not know i have been involved for two years working with farmers in the area. nick: ms. deacon, you can respond. ms. deacon: john, did you do a google search before you made these claims? i mean, it is ridiculous. the fema flood map is a good example. senator gillibrand, i brought her down here to look at how this does impact our community. to get retard with fema them off the map. -- we worked hard with fema to get them off the map. you can't just point to random things that you think you had input on when you did not. you have not been paying attention to this. i am not in congress. i don't have the ability to do anything, but i want people to know that i have been fighting for them for the last six years and will continue to fight when

i am in congress. just because you have not done anything on this issue does not mean it is my problem. >> 15 seconds. rep. katko: if you were working on the fema flood map for 10 years and were not able to change it, you failed. if you have been working on the blue-green algae issue, you need to know that we have been working on it since i have it in congress. period. nick: we will go to transportation. this question is for congressman katko. the decision of the future of interstate 81 will be made by new york, but whether it becomes an elevated highway or a boulevard, there will be an impact on the community at large. do you think one option is better than the other, and what would you do to make sure future decisions benefit both city and suburban residents? rep. katko: thank you. it is good to have a change of pace on these questions. i am proud of the highway bill. like i said i was a lead , negotiator on the bill that brought the first highway bill in a generation, a decade. as a part of that i was able to , ensure that thousand jobs were

generated from the rebuilding of like my opponent, i agree with 81. her when she says let's see what the community says. that is what i think, too. i want to see what the community rallies behind. it's not my job to pick a thing. it's my job to make sure the process is complete. that is what i have been doing since i got into office. i want to make sure it considers the tunnel option and the recessed highway option. moving forward, now that we are down to two options, the viaduct or the boulevard. i think, what has not happened that needs to happen is more discussion in outlying areas. i advocated and sent letters to the department of transportation to make sure that the width is part of the equation. if the boulevard option happens, 481 becomes interstate 81, what impact will that have two folks in dewitt, and what impact will that have for the folks on 320 cutting in from the west to the south? therefore we need to make sure , we look at all the things that impact our areas.

maynick: are you happy with the pace so far? it has been talked about for a very long time. rep. katko: i am not going to criticize the pace. i am not going to criticize them at all. we are talking about over a billion dollars. let's face it. 60 years ago, i'm not sure it was the best idea. i am not sure we got it right 60 years ago. if we have to spend more time to get it right, i think that's ok. nick: ms. deacon? ms. deacon: as far as anyone goes, we have to make sure that we are not just thinking about tomorrow, but we are being bold for the future. this is 75-100 years down the road, and we have to make sure that public input is considered. i know we are doing are due diligence with the draft environmental impact statements, looking at the data, but they are looking at more than the transportation project. they are looking at it as far as economic development neighborhood and community , development. i think they are reaching out to communities, having events and forums so people can learn about where we are on the project.

and i think that's what really matters, that we make sure that every voice is heard. in the 1950's, it was a top-down approach, and i think that was the wrong approach to take. nick: to be clear, do you have one preference over another? ms. deacon: no, i want to make sure we have all the data and that we hear directly from the people of this community to make sure they know what is best. when i get into congress, i want to make sure i will fight hard and get the money that is needed to make sure we have the funds in place to do whatever project is decided. nick: ok. question now about the transition of power at the presidential level. donald trump said it last week he will accept the result of next month's election if he winds. castcaveat could still doubt on the legitimacy of the election since he said initially during the final presidential debate he might not accept the election results at all. if elected in november, how would you help ensure the american tradition of the peaceful and orderly transition

of power? we start with you, congressman capital. katko.gressman ca rep. katko: to say that you will not honor the results is ridiculous. it is ridiculous. i have great faith in this country and great faith in the american people. if there is any wrongdoing, it will be exposed. but to say up front that you're not going to accept the result of you don't get what you want is ridiculous indictment on our system that is not warranted. what i am going to do with what i have done since i have been in congress. i will be an independent voice, reach across the aisle. i will endeavor to work with both sides. i have 15 bills passed with all the freshman in congress. everything one, i have a democratic cosponsor as my very first cosponsor. six bills passed into law by a democratic president. that does not happen unless you are an independent voice. i work with everybody to ensure the integrity of the process.

i will tell you a story. i was standing at the back of the house and we had transition of power for the speaker of house. it dramatically affected me. john boehner spoke and was standing near me. paul ryan got up to give a speech acknowledging he has been elected the head of the house of representatives, and when he acknowledged john boehner, and he said, ok. my time to go. i saw him walk out the door to history. to watch that happen, that peaceful transition, inspired me about how great this country is. how much an honor it is to serve. i will do everything i can to protect the integrity of this institution like ridiculous comments like they need process is that like saying the process is rigged. nick: what do you tell supporters of mr. trump who remain deeply concerned or convinced that there will be some sort of fraud? rep. katko: unless there is evidence to that extent, i would wherehem, what i said, people say i think riser

committed, i say, show me the evidence. ms. deacon: i think it proves donald trump is unfit to be president, to be saying things like the election is rigged. or that he will not accept the results him as he winds. he does not have the judgment -- unless he wins. he does not have the judgment and he does not have the temperament. as far as the transition of power, we have seen the history of the united states. when i win, i will go to congress and do everything i can to have a seamless transition. my goal and my focus is the 24th district. as long as it benefits the people of this district and things are going to impact us in a positive way, then i am all for it. that is what my concern is going to be that is what i care about , and that is what i will do moving forward after this election in november. nick: we will be able to get one more question and before we go. this question is directed to ms. deacon. new york's dairy industry is benefiting from a boom in greek yogurt. over the past year, dairy producers in the united states had to dump millions of gallons

an oversupply problem. congress is set to write the next farm bill. what role would you play to ensure new york agriculture is protected? ms. deacon: thanks so much for that question. i do not know if my voters know, but my mom grew up on a dairy farm in rome, new york. my father was a dairy farmer, my uncle was a dairy farmer. i know how hard our farmers are working and how important the agriculture sector is for new york state. agriculture is a big industry here. i have said in some interviews that i would love to be on the ag committee to help draft the farm bill in 2018. i know they are talking about may be starting working on in it 2017. is so important we are making sure our small farmers, medium-sized farmers, and big farmers all have a voice at the table to do everything we can to make sure that they are getting a fair shot and it is a fair and equal footing all over the state and all over the country. nick: i would like it if we

could get a specific, like, how can bury farmers still be able to sell their product at a profit and consumers by that product at a reasonable price? how do you achieve that balance? ms. deacon: we have to work together with the community and with our farm bureau to make sure we are doing everything we can so they are getting inadequate price for the dairy they are producing. making sure we are looking at the formulas they have in place. i do not know if you are familiar with it, but it is a very formulaic process for how much you pay for milk. let us see more of our dairy industry boom with the greek yogurt. when i worked in the office we , worked to help get the yogurt into school lunches as a protein. it started as a pilot program and became a permanent program to be able to help provide more opportunities for our yogurt industry. those are ways we can help. nick: congressman katko? rep. katko: to answer the question directly, you have to expand the markets for the dairy farmers.

another disastrous affect of the free-trade trade agreement, nafta is one of them. canada is restricting the ability for new york dairy farmers to sell their milk in canada. they have major dairies supplying them. canada is restricting their access to that market. as technology has developed, i have visited those places, and have learned that technologies are developing which will allow the shelf life of dairy products to increase dramatically. that means we can ship those things farther and farther away from upstate new york. we need to increase the markets for them. we cannot wait for the next five-year farm bill. we have to work now. i did. i sent a letter among many others protesting canada's unfair trade practices with respect to this. i have also supported measures to help expand the market for milk access nationwide. nick: we will have to go to closing statements. first up is congressman katko. rep. katko: thank you. on november 9, the day after the

election, and my birthday, one of two deeply flawed presidential candidates are going to be president-elect. the question i have for you is who do you think is going to be more of an independent ability to stand up to whoever is in the white house? not only that, who do you think is going to be more of a act in , a more bipartisan manner in congress? i went to calm with because i could say things are broken. i became one of the most independent members in congress by having the guts to stand up to my party when i felt it was right. i did so by making tough choices on both despite the political -- on votes despite the political expediency for me doing otherwise. we have accomplished much this term, but there is so much more i want to accomplish. i want to work hard to make you safe, go to bed feeling safe. i want to continue with many other programs. with your vote and help on november eighth, i will be able to do that. and it would be a nice birthday present for me, too. god bless you and god bless the united states of america. nick: congressman katko, thank

you. ms. deacon. ms. deacon: thank you very much. i want to let the voters know out there that i will work harder than anybody has ever worked. i will be stronger than anybody has ever been and i will be the best representative for this district. for the last six years, i worked in senator gillibrand's office. six years, i worked in the mayor's office. i know the challenges that we face. i know the issues. but i want to bring my voice to congress and truly represent the people of this district, not just those at the top. you know we need to work to keep , social security solvent, protectto work to medicare and provide opportunities for people of this district. these are things my opponent does not even talk about. we need somebody who will represent the people here who knows what it is like for so many families that are struggling. as somebody who just paid off my student loans last year, as who paid my way through college with minimum-wage jobs and student loans as somebody who is , a single mom whose son goes to public school in the city of syracuse, i know what we face.

but i want to go to congress and be a voice at the table where we have not had a voice before. so i hope i can count on your vote november 8. thank you very much. nick: ms. deacon, thank you very much. that does it for our new york 24 debate. thanks to congressman john cap and colleen deacon. thank you for watching at home. election day is november 8 so please go out and vote. geoff: stay with time warner news for information around new york. have a great night. >> thank you. ♪ more's been brings you debates this week from key u.s. house, senate, and governors races. tonight at 8:00 eastern on georgia senate

debate between republican senator johnny isakson, democratic challenger jim barksdale, and libertarian, alan buckley, and then before 9:00, democratic congressman rick nolan and republican stuart mills debate for minnesota's eighth district seat. colorado'sdebate for sixth congressional district between the public and representative mike coffman and democrat morgan carroll. saturday night at 10:00 on c-span, the pennsylvania senate debate between pat toomey and democrat katie mcginty, followed at 11:00, democrat: venison and republican chris sununu debate in the new hampshire race. at midnight on c-span, the north carolina governors they between republican governor patrick worry, it democrat roy cooper and libertarian. now until election day, watch queue debates from house, senate, and governors races on the c-span network, c-span.org, and listen on the c-span radio app. c-span, where history unfolds daily.

♪ after i came up with my idea for reproductive rights, i went and did research. i knew i could find information on that and that would also help me figure out what points i wanted to say about it, and how to format my outline for my piece. >> i think i took a very methodical approach to this, but i think that really was a piece of this, i would say. it is just a process of the working and reworking, so i don't trying to come up with what my actual theme was, i was doing research at the same time and coming up with more ideas for what i could film, and i came up with an idea, like this would be a great shot, so i think about that and that gave me a new idea for something else to focus on so i do research about that. hope process is just about

scratching what does not work and you keep going until you finally get a good product. >> your message to washington, d.c.. what is the most urgent issue for the new president and congress to address in 2017? our competition is open to all middle school and high school students with $100,000 awarded in cash prizes. students can work alone or in a group of up to three to produce a five to seven minute documentary on the issue selected. include c-span programming and opposing opinions. the $100,000 in cash prizes will be awarded and shared between 150 students and 53 teachers. the grand prize, $5,000, will go to the student or team with the best overall entry. this year's deadline is january 20, 2017, so mark your calendars and help us spread the word to student film makers. for more information, go to our website,

>> donald trump speaks to supporters in springfield, ohio. he talked about his immigration policy and health care. this is about 40 minutes. ♪ >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the next president of the united states, donald j. trump. [applause] ♪